REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES DEPARTMENT OF PUSLIC WORKS AND HIGHWAYS RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUND PROJECT (USAID PROJECT NO. 492-0420) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS OCTOBER 1990 Mindanao Island General Santos City/ ' fl South Cotabato Development ­ - LOUIS BERGER INTERNATIONAL, INC. 100 Halsted Street, East Orange, NJ,07019, U.S.A /fl ert.,e h 0 TCGIj ENGINEERS 150 L-caz-p St, Legwam, V a.;eal..Meto Yanrla Phd, p.nes VOLUME I MASTER REPORT VI. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT A. INTRODUCTION 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The General Santos City/South Cotabato (GSC/SC) Project is a portion of the overall Rural Infrastructure Fund Project being undertaken by the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) with funding from th6 United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The GSC/SC Project entails preparing feasibility studies for ten road improvement projects and final design for one road improvement project. Figure 6-1 illustrates the location of the eleven sub-projects; Table 6-1 lists the roads and their respective lengths. All of the sub-projects, with the exception of Road Sectors 10 and 11, will entail the upgrading of gravel/dirt feeder roads to all weather roads. Road Sector 10 entails the construction of a bypass to General Santos City (GSC) while Road Sector 11 entails upgrading the National Highway between GSC and Davao City. All of the sub-projects are in the Province of South Cotabato in Mindanao, with the exception of a 4.3 kilometer extension of Road Sector 11 (known as Sector liB) into the Province of Davao del Sur. The environmental assessments are a part of studies which are being conducted to determine if the projects are feasible from an engineering, economic, social and environmental standpoint. If i road is considered feasible, specifications and terms of reference for the award of a contract will be prepared for a firm to undertake detailed plans and specifications and hire subcontractors to construct a combination of roads. The total length of roads to be constructed will depend on the available funding. In the case of Road Sector i., the road has already been found foasible and the final design has been prepared along with the environmental assessment. An additional 4.3 kilometer extension into Davao del Sur has been added to the road for which only preliminary design will be prepared due to its addition to the scope of work at a late date. However, the environmental assessment will includes Sector lB. Also, within Sector II, a 2.9 kilometer Section known as 11A has been identified and a realignment has been recommended. 2. OBJECTIVE OF THIS REPORT An individual environmental assessment has been completed for each of the Road Sectors shown in Figure 6-1 and listed in Tanle 6-1. Many of these assessments are very similar in nature given the similarities of the various Road Sectors. This report Master Report vI-I o SULTAN KUDARAT " . 7 LNORALA ~~* KOLAMBOG -'- N'BALUYAN KORONADALj,BA -­ 2 T z//."//A 'T-AAMIAKAN MLNO j ,,.KSURALLAHAUNO 6 MSUGO \UPI 6 T 4B~l" .-LANDAN I " T T'BOLI POLOMOLO® LAKE SEBU LAB MALISBONG' . r ALIGNMENT TO BE VERIFIED, 10 N~ C-2o jz- O L A N DRAWING NO RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUND PROJECT GENERAL SANTOS CITY/ SOUTH COTABATO LOUIS BERGER .JOINTVENTURE. FIGURE : LOCATION OF ROAD SECTORS TCGI ENGINEERS CONSULTING ENGINEERS Mcser fer VI-2 TABLE 6 - 1 PROPOSED ROAD SECTORS SECTOR LENGTH 1. Koronadal-Tampakan-Tupi 28.6 2. GSC/Buayan River-Glan 47.4 3. GSC/Makar-Malisbong 120.5 4. Polomolok-Landan 15.5 5. Surallah/Lamsugod-Tupi 35.3 6. Surallah-Lake Sebu 21.5 7. Surallah-T'Boli 21.4 8. Banga-Noralla-Kolambog 23.2 9. Labu-Silway 8 19.5 10. GSC Bypass unknown 11. GSC/Lagao-Malungon-Baluyan 62 Master Report VI - 3 will endeavour to describe the roaa projects in the context of the environment of the Province of South Cotabato, to identify common environmental implications of road projects and some of the possible mitigative measures, and to highlight the environmental issues related to the project. B. REQUIREMENTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS Requirements for Environmental Assessments (EA) are common to both the United States and the Philippines and, as the project is governed by legislation promulgated by both governments, the purposes of the (EA) was to fulfil the legislative obligations of both governments. Over and above the legislative requirements, environmental assessments are a useful planning tool. The identification of potential environmental conflicts early in the planning process allows for incorporation of mitigation measures into the construction process and, when impacts are significant, alternatives to the project may be identified. The Government of the Philippines (GOP) requires that Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) be prepared if a project is determined to be 1) environmentally critical and/or 2) located in an environmentally critical area. Environmentally critical projects include major roads and bridges. (Office Circular No.3(1983)) At this time only major urban road projects have been included in the category and, therefore the rural infrastructure projects are excluded from categorical project descriptions requiring an EIS. While the GOP requirements do not call for an Environmental Impact Statement (as defined by GOP) for rural road improvements, the potential that any of the roads may impact an area that falls in one of the environmentally critical areas(as defined by GOP) exists. Environmentally Critical Areas include: 1. national parks, watershed reserves, wildlife preserves and sanctuaries; 2. aesthetic potential tourist areas; 3. areas which constitute the habitat for any endangered or threatened species of indigenous Philippine flora and fauna; 4. areas of unique historic, archaeological, or scientific interest; 5. areas traditionally occupied by cultural communities or tribes; Master Report VI-4 6. areas frequently visited and/or hard-hit by natural calamities (geologic hazards, floods, typhoons, volcanic activity,etc); 7. areas with critical slope(40% or more); 8. areas classified as prime agricultural lands; 9. recharge areas of aquifers; 10. waterbodies; 11. mangrove areas; and 12. coral reefs. USAID policy stipulates that the environmental consequences of USAID-financed activities must be identified and considered and appropriate environmental safeguards adopted prior to final decision to proceed with any activity. An order of procedures is outlined for the examination of environmental effects. Under the procedures, there are four categories of activities: 1. Exemption - no EA required. 2. Categorical exclusions - no EA required 3. Classes of actions normally having a significant effect on the environment - EA is automatically required and possibly an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). 4. "Gray areas" where an Initial Environmental Evaluation (IEE) is required to determine whether significant impacts are or are not likely and if an EA or an EIS is required. Those "classes of actions normally having a significant effect on the environment" and automatically requiring an EA include: "penetration road building or road improvement projects" (Title 22, Code of Federal Regulations(CFR), Part 216). Therefore, in order to fulfil these requirements, Environmental Assessments were conducted for the GSC/SC Project. Under USAID requirements, an EIS is required when a project will significantly affect: 1) the global environment or 2) the environment of the United States. Clearly, this is not the case in this Project and, therefore, it has been determined that an EIS is not required. USAID has also produced a policy paper on Environment and Natural Resources which also provides guidance in the examination of development projects. The paper identifies Tropical Forests and Biological Diversity as special concerns. The U.S. Foreign Assistance Act(Section 118) further specifies that assistance be denied for the construction or upgrading of roads that pass through relatively undegraded forest lands. Master Report VI-5 Because an Environmental Assessment under USAID's requirements fulfills many of the requirements of an Environmental Impact Statement as defined by the GOP, a single locument which combines the two was produced for each of the Road -ectors. These are referred to as Environmental Assessments(EA). C. METHODOLOGY 1. LITERATURE REVIEW AND PERSONAL CONTACTS A review of literature available on the Province of South Cotabato was undertaken and the relevant documents were collected for use by the Study Team. Where documentation on South Cotabato was unavailable, information on the Philippines was extrapolated and used. Additional information was gathered from the offices of the Department of Natural Resources and Environment (DENR) in both Manila and Koronadal (Provincial Office). A list of references, both literature and personal contacts, is included in this Chapter. 2. SCOPING SESSION A scoping session was held in GSC on July 25, 1990 as part of the overall environmental assessments of the GSC/SC project. The goals of the scoping session were: a. to identify the local environmental concerns related to the proposed rural improvements in the GSC/SC Project, b. to focus the more intensive work of the Environmental Assessment on the areas of greatest concern, and c. to identify those portions of the project that have little or no significant environmental effects. Over 80 invitations were issued to a cross section of government organizations, non-government organizations, and knowledgeable individuals to attend the scoping session and/or to comment on the projects in writing. (A map of the project area with the proposed roads clearly defined was provided.). Of the 20 individuals that attended, six was from Louis Berger International and TCGI, and most of the remaining participants were representatives of NGOs operating in South Cotabato. 3. FIELD STUDIES The first field studies consisted of aerial overflights of the entire area and the videotaping of the Road Sectors being considered for improvements. As a result of these flights and comments received by USAID from NGOs in the United States connected with NGOs in the project Master Report VI-6 area, it was determined that Road Sectors 5, 6, and 7 were the most environmentally sensitive.